The Archbishop of Dublin is a curious man. His commentary about the Church in contemporary Ireland often intrigues, sometimes baffles me.
This month sees the 10th anniversary of his appointment to Dublin.
He has addressed the subject several times in a number of notable keynote addresses.
Most recently the archbishop was in New York speaking at Fordham University.
More often than not, the archbishop is in ‘reality check’ mode, busting whatever ‘myths’ be believes his audience may have.
He never misses a chance, for example, to tell people just how low Mass attendance is in his Dublin archdiocese.
There’s also usually a reference to his disappointment that the Church in Ireland doesn’t do enough to reach out to young people.
One might say he never misses an opportunity to tell people just how tough things are in the Church in Ireland.
Shared vision
Now, as one often invited to give speeches, I have no objection to someone having an all-occasion ‘stump speech’.
Nobel Peace Prize winner John Hume was famed for his so-called ‘single transferrable speech’ calling for a shared vision for the future of the island of Ireland.
Speaking of which, the archbishop oddly offered his insight into contemporary Northern Ireland. I don’t know how engaged – or interested – Dr Martin is in matters North of the border.
I haven’t heard him on the issue before, but he offered a glimpse into his views in his Fordham address. I get the impression he’s targeting someone when he says: “There are some who feel that all the answers to the problems of the Church in Ireland might be solved by learning from Northern Ireland where years of conflict forged a tighter Catholic identity.
There may be some truth in that but it could also be misleading as Northern Ireland itself is changing,” according to the archbishop.
How exactly is the North changing? Well, the archbishop doesn’t elaborate except to express the view that “a very large number of Northern Irish Catholics would favour staying in the United Kingdom”.
Quite what that has to say about renewal of the Church in Ireland – North and South – is lost on this particular pundit.
Catholic pundits
Which brings me to another point: later in the Fordham speech, Archbishop Martin has a go at what he describes as ‘Catholic pundits’.
Asking, “Where are the points of contact between the Church and the new culture of Irish society?” the archbishop makes a stab at answering his own question: “we have men and women who take this task on in the media world.”
But here comes the sucker punch: “Much of our Catholic punditry is as ideological as much of the punditry of the other side.
“Catholic punditry of this kind will only appear to the other side as narrow defensiveness, while the analogous secular punditry will be perceived as entrenched anti-Catholicism,” the archbishop insists.
Perhaps there’s some merit in what the archbishop is saying. Maybe if he knows a better way to present the Church teaching he might let Catholic pundits know rather than just slagging them off.
There are a few people – many of them columnists in this newspaper – who are consistently in the media standing up for a Catholic pro-life ethic, bringing the Church’s voice to matters of concern for the common good and generally bringing the voice of faith to the public square.
They usually do so in a hostile environment where their views and values are often ridiculed.
They do so when senior prelates, like Archbishop Martin, are often silent on these issues or ‘unavailable’ for media comment.
Hierarchy
Now, I’m not the sort of person who thinks the hierarchy has to be leading everything. Commenting in the media and presenting the richness of the Catholic tradition is very much part of the lay sphere and the mission of every baptised person.
It’s a bit disheartening, however, to be slagged off by the Archbishop of Dublin in the process – especially when these remarks are often delivered abroad whether in Marquette, Rimini, Oxford or Fordham.
I don’t think anyone is expecting a pat on the back, but no-one expects a kick in the stomach either.
Dr Martin has rightly won a lot of praise for his handling of clerical sexual abuse. He hasn’t been alone among senior Churchmen in moving Heaven and Earth to ensure that the Church is a safe environment for children, but he has managed to get most of the positive media commentary.
From my perspective, and from the perspective of many priests of his diocese that I’ve spoken to, his stewardship of the Church in Dublin has been less impressive. It’s ten years this week since Diarmuid Martin was appointed coadjutor Archbishop of Dublin.
True, it was 11 months later before Cardinal Desmond Connell retired and Archbishop Martin took overall charge of the diocese. It’s quite a while.
A US President – if he’s lucky – gets a maximum of two four-year terms to bring about change. All-in-all Margaret Thatcher was only Prime Minister of Britain for 11 years and she is acknowledged to have radically changed British political life.
I’ve been reflecting from time-to-time over the past few years as I’ve read different instalments Archbishop Martin’s speeches generally along the same lines. It strikes me that he is first-rate in diagnosing the problems facing the Church.
He’s the sort of man who during a major incident you would put in charge of making an initial assessment of what is wrong. I’d be more cautious about buying into his vision for the reform and renewal of the Church.
But, perhaps I’m being unfair: I have to honestly admit I don’t really know what his plan is. I know what he’s against and what he thinks is being done wrong, and that Catholic pundits are polemicists and that the Church doesn’t do enough for young people and that Mass attendance is in a terrible state in Dublin…the list goes on.
It reminds me of a quote from G.K. Chesterton where he observed that “the reformer is always right about what is wrong. He is generally wrong about what is right.”
Outsider
At heart, I think the difficulty with Archbishop Martin’s analysis is his tendency to come across merely as an interested outsider in the Church in Ireland.
It’s as if he hasn’t been in charge in Dublin for the past decade or as if he has been denied a chance to bring his vision to the problems facing the Church.
Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin has been praised for bringing his party back from virtual oblivion.
A number of recent opinion polls have even shown remarkably, Fianna Fáil to be the most popular party in the country.
Mr Martin hasn’t achieved this by going around the country moaning about the terrible state that the party is in.
He hasn’t achieved this by going overseas to let audiences know that the party he inherited from Brian Cowen was in an even worst state than it appears.
He has done it by hard work and articulating a vision that people are willing to give themselves to.
There’s surely a lesson in this?